Haringey London Borough Council (202305289)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202305289

Haringey London Borough Council

8 March 2024

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

The complaint is about:
1. The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the property.
2. The associated complaint handling.

Background

The resident holds a secure tenancy. The property is a 4-bedroom house. The landlord was aware of various vulnerabilities within the household, including some of her 6 children having learning difficulties and additional needs. Her youngest child was less than a year old at the time of the complaint.
The resident made a stage 1 complaint to the landlord on 30 January 2023. She said that she had reported rising damp and mould in June 2022, and the landlord attended and confirmed that the cause was the outside render of the property deteriorating. The landlord had said it would contact her to arrange a surveyor to inspect the rendering, but that she had not had any updates. She said she had contacted the landlord multiple times but that the damp and mould had worsened and was impacting other rooms. She also told the landlord that she had a young baby.
The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 14 February 2023. It upheld her complaint. It said that it had inspected the brickwork on 10 June 2022 and a surveyor inspection was recommended at the time. It apologised for not arranging this and for any inconvenience it had caused. It said it needed to arrange the surveyor inspection, which it had scheduled for 23 February 2023. It said that it would plan any internal works once the external works were completed. It assured the resident that it would book further appointments in without delay, and that updates would be communicated to her.
The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the complaints process on 27 February 2023. She was unhappy that she still had damp and mould in the property and had been raising complaints for over a year. She said that the surveyor inspected the property on 21 February 2023. The operative had told her that the property required major works and had a category 1 hazard, and that a mould wash would not be sufficient to resolve the issues. The landlord contacted her the following day to arrange a mould wash. She said that she advised what the operative had said, but she was told it would call her back to discuss this. She said that she also raised concerns with running a dehumidifier daily for 2 years, which the landlord had given her, and that she had debt on her electricity meter because of this. She did not receive any contact from the landlord as it had promised. She said that she had 6 children, 3 of which were under the age of 10, 1 was clinically vulnerable, and 1 was a baby under a year old. She said that the damp and mould was impacting their health, as well as their school attendance and performance.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 14 April 2023. It apologised for its delayed response. It said that it was aware of the damp being reported in 2021 but this was not resolved. It said that:
1. It inspected the damp and mould on 5 April 2023 in response to her complaint escalation. It found that the rendering had deteriorated and required replacement. It needed to fully remove the rendering, check for any external works required, and replace the rendering.
2. The issues were not a category 1 hazard, but considering the vulnerabilities of the household, it considered it appropriate to temporarily move the household for the duration of the works. It expected this work to take 5 weeks. It allocated her a housing liaison officer to oversee the temporary move.
3. It would likely need to complete internal works to make good any damaged areas of plasterwork to the walls. It said it would do this after the external work had been completed.
4. It repeatedly failed to undertake the work necessary to resolve the problem for the resident. It apologised that it had took so long to properly identify the cause of the damp and mould.
5. It was working hard to improve its repairs service. It said that its housing services were taking steps to be more proactive in cases involving damp and mould.
6. It offered £2,717 compensation due to the delays that the resident had encountered. This included:
  1. £298 for an initial category C repair, calculated from June 2021 until June 2022 when the resident reported the damp and mould again.
  2. £473 for a category A repair due to the worsening condition from June 2022 to the end of May 2023.
  3. £200 for her time and trouble in having to pursue the works through the complaints process.
  4. £366 for the use of the dehumidifier and running costs.
  5. £1,380 as a discretionary payment in recognition of the damage caused to the decorations in the property.
7. It recognised that the complaint was yet to be fully resolved. It said that it was working with her to progress the outstanding repairs to the property, and it was committed to completing this for her.
8. Any issues related to personal damages or damaged items had to be made as an insurance claim.
On 24 April 2023, the landlord reviewed its compensation award and offered an additional £345.68. It said that this was in recognition of the dehumidifier running costs at the present energy prices. The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s handling of the damp and mould issues and escalated her complaint to this Service. It became one we could investigate on 7 July 2023.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

The resident has said that the issues related to damp and mould had been ongoing since at least 2021. The Ombudsman cannot consider complaints which relate to historical events because the quality and availability of any evidence that may have existed at the time may not be present now. The focus of this investigation will therefore be from when the damp and mould issues were reported in June 2022. We will consider events up until the landlord’s final complaint response, in April 2023, and whether the landlord completed the actions that it said it would within its final complaint response. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(b) of the Scheme.
It is evident that the resident is currently experiencing issues which have occurred after the landlord’s final complaint response. These relate to payments made during the decant period, issues related to further damp and mould found after the resident returned to the property and a social care referral made by the landlord. The Ombudsman cannot investigate matters that did not go through the landlord’s internal complaint process. The resident may wish to log a new complaint for the landlord to investigate her concerns and have the opportunity to put things right. She may then bring that complaint to the Ombudsman as a new case to be investigated were she to be unhappy with the landlord’s response. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(a) of the Scheme.
The resident stated in her complaint that the health of her household had been affected by the damp and mould in the property. While this Service does not doubt the resident’s comments about their health, it is outside our remit to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This is in accordance with paragraph 42(f) of the Scheme. This Service has considered the general distress and inconvenience which the situation may have caused the resident and her household.

The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the property

The landlord’s repairs handbook states that repairs which are not an emergency will be arranged for an appointment within 28 days of the repair being reported. It states that planned repairs, where the repairs need to be pre-inspected and the job may take several days to complete, will be inspected within 28 days of the repair being reported. It adds that it will advise a date for when the works would be carried out during the inspection.
The resident reported the damp and mould concerns to the landlord on 6 June 2022. The issues were present in the bedroom and living room. The landlord acted appropriately by arranging 2 operatives to attend on 10 June 2022. This was for a painter to complete a mould wash internally and for a bricklayer to inspect the property externally. However, only the bricklayer attended, and the landlord did not update the resident regarding the mould wash being cancelled or rescheduled. She said that the bricklayer had advised her that the property required a surveyor inspection, and that the landlord would contact her to arrange this.
The landlord did not contact the resident as it agreed to, and the resident said in her stage 1 complaint that she had to contact it a week after the operative attended. The landlord told her it would reschedule a painter to complete the mould wash on 28 July 2022, but she said that it needed to attend to inspect the property externally instead. The landlord said it would contact her to discuss this, but it did not. She said that she chased the landlord a further 2 times without any updates. She then contacted the landlord on 10 November 2022 to report the damp and mould and that she had a young baby in the house. The resident has told this Service that she also contacted the landlord again in December 2022 about this, albeit this Service has not been provided with evidence of this.
Following the resident’s stage 1 complaint, the landlord acknowledged its failings which was appropriate, and it upheld the complaint at stage 1. It outlined that it would put things right by completing the surveyor inspection as previously agreed. It said that this would allow it to have a full specification of works and that it would carry out internal works after it had successfully completed the external works. It was appropriate for the landlord to advise how it would put things right for the resident. It then explained how it would learn from this going forward, by ensuring that works would be completed without delay and said it would provide updates to the resident. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s complaint handling principles which are to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
The damp survey was completed on 21 February 2023. It identified damp in multiple rooms within the property. In the resident’s complaint escalation, on 27 February 2023, she said that the surveyor told her that the property required major works and was a category 1 hazard. She said that she was told the landlord would contact her to arrange follow up works as the property required more than a mould wash alone. However, the landlord contacted her the day after the inspection to arrange the mould wash. After the resident raised concerns with this following the advice from the surveyor, the landlord said it would contact her to discuss the works needed. There is no evidence to suggest that the landlord did this. She had also told the landlord during this call about her concerns with the running costs of the dehumidifier that the landlord gave her 2 years prior, and that the damp and mould had impacted the health of the household.
It is evident that the landlord did not arrange a schedule of works required at the property until 7 March 2023, which was after the resident escalated her complaint. This was not appropriate. There is no evidence provided as to why there was a delay between the inspection and production of the schedule of works. This delay would have added distress and inconvenience to the resident as she was not aware of any works being organised during this time.
On 9 March 2023, the landlord’s records state that it spoke to the resident, and she said that she did not want a mould wash completed, but she wanted the repairs carried out to resolve the issues. The landlord raised a job on 17 March 2023 to complete the works identified by the surveyor’s inspection and later produced a schedule of works. It had a target date of 12 May 2023 to complete these works. It is unclear why there was a delay between the schedule of works being produced and raising a job to complete the works. This would have added further detriment to the resident.
In the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response, it acknowledged its lack of action in resolving the issues in the property. It said it had repeatedly failed to complete the works necessary and apologised for this. It was appropriate for the landlord to explain how it would learn from the complaint as it said it was improving its repairs service and taking steps to be more proactive in cases involving damp and mould.
The landlord said in its stage 2 complaint response that it completed a further inspection on 5 April 2023, but it has not provided the Ombudsman with the report produced from this visit. This is a record keeping failure by the landlord because it relied on information in its final complaint response which was not provided to the Ombudsman. The stage 2 complaint response outlined that the rendering had deteriorated and caused damp to penetrate the property in various areas. It said it needed to temporarily move the resident to complete the works as it had considered the vulnerabilities of the household. It reassured her that the property did not have any category 1 hazards. It said that it expected the works to take 5 weeks and that she would be temporarily moved (decanted) during this period.
The landlord awarded a total of £2,717 compensation in the stage 2 complaint response. This included compensation of £771 for the delay in resolving the damp problem, £200 for the resident’s time and trouble in pursuing the works through the complaints process, £366 for the dehumidifier running costs and £1,380 discretionary compensation towards damage to the decorations within the property. It then awarded a further £345.68 after the final complaint response, on 24 April 2023. It said that this was in recognition of the dehumidifier running costs at the present energy prices.
The landlord’s calculations of the £771 compensation for the delay in resolving the damp problem was incorrect. Its discretionary compensation procedure outlines that for category C repairs which are unresolved, it will pay £10 initial payment, £2 per day for up to 3 weeks and £5 per week until the repair is resolved. For category A repairs which are unresolved, it will pay £10 initial payment, £2 per day for up to 3 weeks and £10 per week until the repair is resolved. The procedure does not outline what is considered to be a category A or C repair.
Using the above information, the Ombudsman’s calculations show that the total should have been £824 compensation rather than the landlord’s calculations of £771 for the delay in resolving the damp problem. The Ombudsman has calculated this at £292 for the category C repair from 15 June 2021 to 6 June 2022 plus £532 for the category A repair from 6 June 2022 to 31 May 2023. It was a failing of the landlord to not explain its calculations fully. If it had done this, it could have identified an error in its calculations.
The landlord is therefore ordered to reassess its calculations of its £771 compensation to ensure that its calculations were in line with its procedure. It should pay any additional compensation to the resident if it finds any miscalculation in its compensation award.
The total offer of compensation was £3,062.68 and it was appropriate for the landlord to offer redress given the failings it had identified in its handling of reports of damp and mould in the property. Its offer of compensation and apology and explanation of how it would put things right going forward showed that the landlord took the resident’s complaint seriously. The award of compensation also considered her request for the running costs of the dehumidifier to be paid to her which was appropriate for the landlord to address, despite this not being raised in the original complaint. At this stage, the compensation and redress were appropriate in consideration of the distress and inconvenience experienced by the resident. This was a significant compensation award in the range that the Ombudsman would recommend for failings that have had a serious impact on a resident.
It was also appropriate for the landlord to outline in its stage 2 complaint response that the resident should raise an insurance claim if she wished to be reimbursed for any damaged items or personal damages. This was a reasonable response and good practice for the landlord to ensure that the resident’s request was independently investigated. This advice was also in line with the landlord’s housing compensation policy.
The landlord proposed a set of actions in its final complaint response. It had said that it had learned from its mistakes and that it would be more proactive in cases such as this, where damp and mould issues were present. The Ombudsman has considered some of the events that occurred after the end of the complaints process as they are directly linked to the matters that the landlord investigated as part of the complaint and later promised in the final complaint response.
Considering evidence provided to the Ombudsman relating to events after April 2023, the timescales set out by the landlord were not met. The resident was advised that the decant period was estimated at 5 weeks, but the decant actually lasted for more than 14 weeks. Regardless of the reason for the delay, this would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident, who was decanted from 8 June 2023 to 16 September 2023. This was a substantial period of time. The actual length of time that the decant period ultimately ended up being was not considered in the landlord’s final complaint response and therefore the Ombudsman has considered redress for this matter.
The resident raised concerns to the Ombudsman about the quality of communications during this period, which was an area that the landlord previously acknowledged failings in and said it would improve on. The Ombudsman has not been provided with any evidence to suggest that the landlord improved its communications during this period, and instead, the evidence showed a continuing theme of lack of communication.
The resident was decanted and chose to stay with family on 8 June 2023. On 19 June 2023, some 11 days later, she contacted the landlord to ask when works would commence. Similarly, the resident was unaware of when she could expect to return to the property and she contacted the landlord on 25 August 2023 to seek an update. The apparent lack of communication and the poor records of checks undertaken before the resident returned to the property suggest that the landlord had not learned the lessons that it said it had. If it had made timely communication, it would have provided reassurance to the resident and instilled trust in the landlord’s efforts, but there is no evidence provided to suggest that it did so. It is not the resident’s responsibility to oversee or manage repairs, the landlord should have been updating her to prevent any such inconvenience caused to her.
The landlord has told this Service that it completed a post-inspection on 29 September 2023. This would have been after the resident returned to the property following the decant period. It is unclear why the landlord completed a post-inspection after the resident returned as it would have been good practice to do so in advance of the return in case this highlighted any further issues and works required. This would have understandably caused the resident to feel uncertain as to whether the works to resolve the damp and mould concerns in the property were successful or if the landlord’s repairs had been completed fully. It is understood that the resident experienced further problems with damp and mould following her return to the property. The landlord is ordered to inspect the property regarding the damp and mould currently being reported by the resident. It should then produce an action plan with expected completion dates and provide this to the resident and this Service.
The timescale for the decant period was substantially longer than proposed as the resident was decanted for a further 9 weeks longer than she was promised. The landlord’s actions after the final complaint response failed to demonstrate that it had learned lessons to be more proactive as it did not provide timely communication and updates to the resident. Considering both the delay to the decant period, and the lack of clarity of whether the works were completed effectively due to the lack of post-inspection before the resident returned to the property, would have understandably added further distress and inconvenience to the resident. The resident subsequently reported further damp and mould concerns after returning to the property and this would have added further distress and inconvenience again.
Considering this, the Ombudsman has found that the landlord has not acted in accordance with this Service’s dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. The Ombudsman therefore finds a determination of maladministration appropriate in light of this.
The landlord is ordered to pay the resident an additional £450 compensation in consideration of the distress and inconvenience caused to her by the landlord’s delay in the decant period. This is calculated at £50 per week for the 9 weeks that it overran its estimate decant period, as advised to the resident in the final complaint response. It is also ordered to pay £200 for its continued failings that it did not put right through its complaints process, regarding the lack of communication and the distress caused by its lack of post-inspection before the resident returned. Additionally, the landlord is ordered to write to the resident and give her the opportunity to provide evidence of any additional costs she may have incurred since April 2023.
The landlord would have been ordered to self-assess against the Ombudsman’s spotlight on knowledge and information management as this would have helped assist with an improvement to its record keeping practices. However, it is not ordered in this case because it has previously completed a self-assessment in relation to a paragraph 49 investigation completed by the Ombudsman, which was published in July 2023.

The associated complaint handling

The landlord’s housing feedback policy states that formal complaints will be acknowledged within 2 working days. It will then provide a stage 1 complaint response within 10 working days. For stage 2 complaints, it will provide a stage 2 complaint response within 20 working days from the date that a resident escalates a complaint.
The resident made a stage 1 complaint on 30 January 2023. The landlord has not provided the Ombudsman with any evidence of the complaint being acknowledged. The landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response on 14 February 2023. The response was provided within 11 working days. This was only a shortcoming as it was just 1 day over the timeframe advised in the landlord’s policy and outlined in the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code). It would have been unlikely for the delay of 1 day to have caused any significant distress and inconvenience to the resident.
The complaint was escalated to stage 2 by the resident on 27 February 2023. The landlord provided an acknowledgement of the complaint escalation on 9 March 2023. It apologised for the delay in acknowledging the complaint and said that it would provide the outcome of the complaint by 3 April 2023. This would have been 25 working days after the complaint was escalated by the resident and so its target response time was not in line with its policy or the Code. This was not appropriate.
On 31 March 2023, the landlord contacted the resident regarding her complaint. It said it could not respond to the complaint within the timeframe it had previously advised her of, and it apologised for any inconvenience caused by its delay. It gave her reasons for the delay occurring, which was due to the availability of its staff to provide the information it required. It said that it would provide a response by 14 April 2023.
The landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response on 14 April 2023, in line with its update previously advised to the resident. This was 33 working days after the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2. The landlord apologised within its complaint response for its response being late.
It was appropriate for the landlord to have apologised on the 3 occasions where it delayed providing the acknowledgement, where it updated the resident that it could not provide its response within its advised timeframe, and within the stage 2 complaint response itself. This was good practice by the landlord as it showed it had considered the impact of the time and trouble caused to the resident.
However, the landlord did not achieve full redress in regards to its complaint handling failure because it did not consider the impact of this on the resident in regards to the distress and inconvenience this would have caused. The resident was still experiencing ongoing issues with the substantive issues of damp and mould during this time. The landlord missed an opportunity to provide appropriate redress by considering compensation due to its failure in providing a timely response to her complaint escalation. The landlord is therefore ordered to pay £50 for its complaint handling failures.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould in the property.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the associated complaint handling.

Orders

Within 28 calendar days of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
1. Apologise to the resident regarding its delays in completing the actions it proposed in its final complaint response, and for any distress and inconvenience caused by this. The apology should be in writing and should be made by a senior member of the landlord’s management team.
2. Pay £3,762.68 compensation. This should be paid directly to the resident and not to the rent account. This is made up as follows:
  1. £2,717 awarded in the stage 2 complaint response, if it has not done so already.
  2. £345.68 awarded on 24 April 2023, if it has not done so already.
  3. An additional £650 for the distress and inconvenience caused by the failings in its handling of reports of damp and mould in the property.
  4. An additional £50 for the associated complaint handling failures.
3. Reassess the calculation of its £771 compensation to ensure that these were in line with its procedure. It should pay any additional compensation to the resident if it finds any miscalculation in its compensation award and provide a full detailed breakdown to her and this Service.
4. Write to the resident and give her the opportunity to provide evidence of any additional costs she may have incurred since April 2023.
5. Inspect the property given the damp and mould currently being reported by the resident. It should then produce an action plan with expected completion dates and provide this to the resident and this Service.
The landlord should reply to this Service with evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescale set out above.